Why the study?
Prolonged and enhanced Holter ECG monitoring showed higher AF detection than 24 h monitoring after stroke, but its cost-effectiveness had not yet been investigated.
Does prolonged and enhanced Holter ECG monitoring reduce costs or improve QALYs compared to standard 24h ECG monitoring in acute ischemic stroke patients?
Does prolonged and enhanced Holter ECG monitoring reduce costs or improve QALYs compared to standard 24h ECG monitoring in acute ischemic stroke patients?
Prolonged and enhanced Holter ECG monitoring for atrial fibrillation detection in acute ischemic stroke patients is likely cost-effective, yielding slightly lower costs without significantly affecting quality of life compared to standard care.
Prolonged monitoring may prove cost-effective post-stroke; leaves open need for outcome trials before practice change.
Objective: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major cause for recurrent stroke, has severe impact on a patient’s health and imposes a high economic burden for society. Current guidelines recommend 24 h ECG monitoring (standard-of-care, SoC) to detect AF after stroke to reduce the risk of future events. However, paroxysmal AF (PAF) is difficult to detect within this period as it occurs infrequently and unpredictably. In a randomized controlled trial (Find-AFRANDOMISED), prolonged and enhanced Holter ECG monitoring (EPM) revealed a significantly higher detection rate of AF compared to SoC, although its cost-effectiveness has not yet been investigated.Methods: Based on the data of FIND-AFRANDOMISED, an economic evaluation was conducted. One group received EPM for 10 days after the event, and at 3 and 6 months; the other group received SoC. Healthcare resource use and quality of life (QoL) data were measured at baseline, and after 6 and 12 months. Incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) between both groups were compared. Non-parametric bootstrapping and one-way-sensitivity analyses were performed.Results: A total of 281 patients with healthcare resource use and QoL data for all measurement points were considered in the economic evaluation (complete case analysis, CCA). The CCA yielded nonsignificant 315€ lower mean costs and 0.0013 less QALYs for patients receiving EPM with no statistically significant differences in any cost categories. Sensitivity analyses revealed robust results. Bootstrapping the results indicated moderate probability of cost-effectiveness.Conclusions: EPM yielded reduced not significantly different costs without affecting QoL and may be a useful strategy to detect PAF in acute ischemic stroke patients in time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Diekmann et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: